Critical Analysis of Waiting for Godot – Samuel Beckett Qaisar Iqbal Janjua Qaisar Iqbal Janjua talks about the “suffering of the being” and how this impacts significantly on views of humanity. The suffering and hopelessness felt by the characters in the play are a result of a lack of agency. The idea of going someplace doesn’t matter as there is really nowhere to go but to wait. Furthermore, as nothing occurs and the plot is almost non-existent, times seems to never end, causing anxiety and apprehension. This is shown through euphemisms in Pozzo: “I don’t seem to be able to… (long hesitation)… to depart. Estragon: “Such is life. ” It is apparent that the two characters, Estragon and Vladimir are stuck in this way of life as most of the play deals with them waiting for a redeemer or a savior to take authority and end their pitiful wait. Janjua also states that “at various times during the play, hope is constructed as a form of salvation, in the personages of Pozzo and Lucky, or even as death. ” He conveys the fact that even in situations with the company of others; it does not offer any consequences of hope.

From Janjua’s opinions, he believes that Beckett portrays the characters suffering from the beginning in order to represent the concept of original sin. This meant that anyone “To be born is to be born a sinner, and thus man is condemned to suffer”. And the only way to escape this form of suffering of emptiness and meaninglessness is to repent or die. On the other hand, both Estragon and Vladimir fail to repent as they wait for Godot to come save them, whilst contemplating on suicide as another way out.

Furthermore according to Janjua, Beckett expresses that there is a split between the body and the intellectual represented through the characterization of Vladimir as the intellect and Estragon as the body or the physical. The characterization of Lucky as “lucky” is another interpretation in the context of the play as most of his actions are determined by Pozzo to pass the time, hence he does not need to think for himself. On the other hand, Pozzo is considered “unlucky” as not only does he need to pass his own time but must also find things for Lucky to perform.

Another idea that Janjua conveys is why Estragon and Vladimir are always together from the start. This arises from the “existentialism of their forgetfulness” which brings them together in being able to re-establish their memories and identities. Estragon serves as a reminder for Vladimir all the things they have done together, reminding each other of their very existence. This is shown through rapid dialogue of Estragon: In the meantime, let’s try and converse calmly, since we’re incapable of keeping silent.

Vladimir: You’re right, we’re inexhaustible. Estragon: It’s so we won’t think. Vladimir: We have that excuse. Lawrence Graver ( Cambridge Student Guide) Lawrence Graver talks about how Godot is to have been perceived as “God”, a savior and a figure of authority, due to the cyclical plot on a successive two days of waiting in hopelessness and an anticipation to be redeemed. Throughout the play, it is obvious to Graver that Godot emerges as someone who appears to have “considerable respectability and power in his community”.

Godot is also perceived to in all earnestness by Estragon and Vladimir as they clearly associate him with concrete images of authority and with less concrete provocative images of divinity – as someone who is able to do something for them. When Pozzo and Lucky appears, Estragon mistakes Pozzo as the man they’re waiting for, and only realizes after the comical exchange of ‘get the name wrong’. This comical sequence is followed by a change in topic at which Godot is immediately forgotten, being only a fragmented piece of memory.

Although Godot is mentioned once or twice when Pozzo asks about their appointment “with this… Godet… Godot… Godin… anyhow you see who I mean, who has your future in his hands.. (pause) …. at least your immediate future? ”, the effect of this illogical and self cancelling rhetoric gradually removes the question of “who is Godot? ” from the realm of the ordinary discourse. Rather than being considered a figure in a realistic narrative, Godot has become a concept – “an idea of promise and expectation” and something that restores significance to their human existence.

Graver tells of how a sense of conclusive admission of defeat is a consequence of a meaningless wait. This is represented throughout the aural texture of the play as well as the metaphor of “Nothing can be done” when Estragon is unable to take his boot off. Graver believes that Beckett is trying to relate this defeat to their situation on earth (or in the existential state of humanity). There are common talks of hats and boots, feeling pain and eating which “goes on simultaneously with dialogue about the nature of existence: of solitude and desire, disappointment and grief, of hope deferred and fulfillment longed for. Another suggested way of thinking is the notion of “succumbing to the silence” when they both stop talking leading to the repetitive stage directions of “[Silence]”. As the characters are unable to bear the long progressive silences which frequently occur, they are ‘restored to the horror of his situation’ in the realization that without speech, they are unable to escape their eternal predicament of waiting nor condemnation.

Author: Brandon Johnson

Related Posts about Analysis Waiting for Godot

The average student has to read dozens of books per year. No one has time to read them all, but it’s important to go over them at least briefly. Luckily, FreeBookSummary offers study guides on over 1000 top books from students’ curricula!